On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 17:02:49 +0200 Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > A sorting by owner would have made hunting for packagers way more > easier (especially if the number of packages owned is bigger then > three or something like that). I'm working on that now. Will be somewhat difficult to list co-maintainers, so just the owner according to koji will be used. > > It's also a rather large number of packages to try > > and automate over, with a large degree of different $release values > > to try and automatically bump (especially without resorting to just > > plonking a ".1" to the end of everything which is against the > > guidelines). > > Is adding a ".1" that bad after a warning period which allows the > maintainers to do it in better ways? Worth discussing. > > > So I ask you, great Fedora Community, how do we want to handle this > > situation? I'm open for suggestions, but we should decide something > > before the end of the day given our time constraints. > > - Don't slip FC8T2 for this > - tell packagers to rebuild their packages > - for all packages not rebuild or queued by <insert time> (let's say > Friday morning maybe?) add a ".1" to release and let a script kick the > rebuilds > - create and run a small script that pokes maintainers by mail which > didn't update the license tags yet > - for all packages which failed rebuild or which license tag was still > not updated in three weeks from now find a solution (nijas?) -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
